Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
I'll take an opportunity to reduce injury by 1% any day.
Rugby League bans the shoulder charge
- Thread starter p.Tah
- Start date
- Status
post 20 joshbristow. Despite how ever many years $BW has been away from mungoland, it is interesting to see how many times he featured in the "Best Years of Shoulder charges" highlights reel.
Torn Hammy
Johnnie Wallace (23)
I couldn't help wondering HJ if you played against Hoppa.
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
They could ban contact altogether and reduce the risk by probably 98%
Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
Well they've banned almost all forms of contest in RL, I don't expect them to stop any time soon.
joshbristow
Peter Burge (5)
He just had a knack for them haha, can't remember him ever getting in trouble for getting one wrong either
Bullrush
John Hipwell (52)
LOL....fair enough!
TBH, I don't get all the anti-league sentiment or the anti-rugby one that comes back the other way.
Both a great games and I've seen boring-ass matches in BOTH codes.....that's sport.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
Looking at that "highlights" video doesn't make me lament the death of the shoulder charge in any way. That type of tackle unnecessarily raises the risk of a head and/or neck injury. I fail to see how running into a bloke with your shoulder makes you any tougher. A ball and all tackle of a 120kg prop forward running at you takes a lot more courage.
joshbristow
Peter Burge (5)
I think the only thing I'll miss is how when used correctly a well timed shoulder charge could level the playing field in regards to size and weight, think Chris Sandow, Cameron Smith or that beautiful Lance Hohaia hit on Petrol Seventycentsalitre.
Mank
Ted Thorn (20)
Yeah, what he said.
As a South African, I had zero exposure to rugby league growing up. I saw it for the first time on TV when I came to the UK. I watch it now and then, I don't love it, and I don't hate it. The shoulder charges surprised me, but even more surprising was how they didn't result in injuries, as I'd been led to expect they would in rugby union.
So, some of you seem pleased that the shoulder charge has been banned. I'm curious why? Surely if it's been in the game for this long it wasn't a chronic source of injury? So why ban it? I ask exactly the same question about RUs decision to ban rucking.
Schadenfreude
John Solomon (38)
Because Violence does not equal Competition.
Because it causes brain damage that doesn't show up until years later.
joshbristow
Peter Burge (5)
Im in the camp of thought that it's high tackles not shoulder tackles that cause all the horrible head injuries, there were just too many unskilled shoulder charges that went wrong this season. Now Money Bill Williams knew how to do it without just throwing his elbow into someone's cheek.
Never done the mungo thing, or being tempted to for that matter, however a Junior Jarse has played against Junior Hoppa in Rugby Sevens.
Maybe you should watch the video again. More than a few of his land on the melon.
Sent using Tapatalk
Mank
Ted Thorn (20)
I'll freely admit to coming from a position of ignorance, and it sounds like this is a pretty widely held view. Is it more scientific than just a 'widely held view'? Have you got links to stats or something?
Otherwise my brain just lumps these sort of things in with the rucking ban, which to me served no real purpose.
The_Brown_Hornet
John Eales (66)
What Sully said. Have a look at that video and note the amount of shots those boys take to the scone. Plenty. Shoulder charges are dangerous and have no place in the code.
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
In rugby union spear tackles account for a small number of injuries. But we outlaw them because for everyone 1000 spear tackles a significant number end up with spinal/back injuries (and are out for a few weeks or more), whereas for every 1000 normal tackles, it is pretty rare when one of them results is a serious injury.
With shoulder charges they have the potential to be extremely forceful and as a result, some of them end up seriously injuring some players. It just isn't a good look for any game, and players shouldn't have to walk out there worried that if they run too fast someone might shoulder barge them hard enough to knock them out easily.
With shoulder charges they have the potential to be extremely forceful and as a result, some of them end up seriously injuring some players. It just isn't a good look for any game, and players shouldn't have to walk out there worried that if they run too fast someone might shoulder barge them hard enough to knock them out easily.
joshbristow
Peter Burge (5)
I made the video haha
I agree though, too many attempted shots did end up on someones chin recently. However I think I would have liked to have seen the NRL trial stricter rules on head high shots before outright banning the charge. I don't think anyone would be sad to see the end of the Inglis,Pritchard or Teo shot's but stuff like this was my jam:
Mank
Ted Thorn (20)
Yes, that is the general sentiment I'm getting.
However, I'm sorry to keep repeating myself, is there anything more to it besides "it's obvious that shoulder charges cause injury"? My point being (and again I'm just repeating myself), it's been in the game for so long, if it was so dangerous I would have expected it to be banned a long time ago.
I'm particularly interested in the claim that it has long term effects. That sounds like something that's come out of a study. I'd like to see that study.
- Status